It needs to match their SEC filings to help reassure investors.
CCCL already doing it:
Btw, this thread is the best coverage on SAIC and SAT records anywhere in the English speaking world.
You got to learn the truth about them, and you won't find a better discussion than this thread anywhere else. It takes time to sink in for the majority.
Yongye's 2010 audited statements for its operating sub filed with the SAT and SAIC and other Chinese regulators in April 2011 have not been stolen. They are public information - available to access for free at the Inner Mongolia's government web site by anybody who is interested, as shown here:
Yongye Nongfeng's 2010 audited statements show that Yongye lied to either the Chinese regulators or to the US investors, or to both.
SAT filings are equivalent to SEC filings. SAIC filings are merely the means to obtain renewed business licenses and are not scrutinized by anyone other than short sellers. They are also unaudited. They need to match SAT and SEC filings and make SAT filings public. That would solidify these companies. Of course it will now mean a greater tax burden for the companies stripping away value from shareholders. You can thank the Illegal Short Selling Hedge Funds and short friendly media for that.
"SAT filings are equivalent to SEC filings."
That was an uneducated statement.
A tax report to the SAT in China by a company is for the benefit of the central government in collecting taxes. Such a report filed is equivalent to an income tax return filed to the IRS by an US company.
An income tax return to the IRS by any public company in the US isn't filed to the SEC, and may actually be materially different from an 10-K filed to the SEC for the same year. A 10-K filing is geared towards investors.
A company in the US normally needs to pay tax to a State in which it resides, with a separate tax return to the State.
The same thing is also true for a Chinese company in most cases.
connorport: Yongye's 2010 SAIC filing has been audited by Inner Mongolia Jun Ye Certified Public Accountants. Yongye's 2010 audited filing with the SAT (delivered to and accepted by SAT in April 2011) IS PUBLIC and is attached in the Appendix here:
It shows three material differences vs the 2010 SEC filing. Yongye lied to either the Chinese regulators or to US investors or to both.
Since Citron published HRBN's SAIC records, the stock has taken a dive and a quick recovery, and closed at $16.31 last week, from a low of $6 on June 16, when 14.66 mln shares changed hands. How many funds and investors lost huge amount of money in one day, just b/c of some dubious "SAIC records"?
That's another example among too many that showed why the shorts coordinated attacks from China to the US loves those "records".
And the funny thing was that few questioned how legit were those sources, b/c none of them showed they had legal access to any of the records. Not to mention gross mis-interpretation of the records.
In essence, those "sources" were highly questionable and suspicious, but investors took them for "granted" as honest sources anyway.
Who're really stupid? One thing has been a certainty - those "sources" of the SAIC records lied mostly.
What a game!
There're a lot of useful things that I'm reluctant to post on a free message board. But when I posted, it usually involved a lot more than what appeared at the first glance. But too many tend to jump to their own conclusions as if they really are greatest traders/investors.
When things get very tough and emotions run to the extreme, most people will always try to grab the nearest straws - the straws are deceiving means to get you in deep trouble, b/c they're just not good enough to save you.
Late 2010 and early 2011 will be remembered as the period when the big crowd holding onto those declining Chinese stocks tried desperately to grab the nearest straws - the SAIC records.
They thought the SAIC records were some sort of magical tool that would turn their fortunes around, while the crooks were selling those records as if they really had a clue about SAIC.
Well, they didn't have a clue, and they just wanted to charge for your subscriptions - the suckers are everywhere for a short period.
I said you didn't ever need the SAIC records, b/c all those records caused were more confusions.
I said you follow the US GAAP, b/c it has worked for the last decade. You don't need to go far to convince yourselves - SINA, BIDU, SOHU, CTRP, PTR, CEO, etc, and many dozens more big winners from China. None of them ever needed the SAIC records. All of them have been audited by a Big-4.
You stick to what have worked.
You stay away from those so-called "magical tools", b/c there isn't such a thing in the stock markets.
Don't argue with the truth. And stay away from those suckers!
That's why I spent that much time to explain to you what SAIC really is to the common stockholders/investors - they're useless at best. At worst, they've been used by those malicious shorts to confuse and to scare you. It worked for a few months.
But never again!
So, go cancel your subscriptions right away, and get your money back.
yo_roe: Has the market looked at those massively material, severe and fraudulent "findings?" Nope. Don't worry, YONG will never be acquired - not only that, MS has already lost $50 million of investor and employee money.
To be honest Rich, you are wearing your frustration and impatience on your sleeve. Demeanor has changed, which is understandable.
The market is not paying much attention to your massively material, severe and fraudulent "findings".
If you had convinced armando that he had concerns, he wouldn't be here.
I would be frustrated if I were you, as well. And if YONG gets acquired, will you continue to post on the acquirer's MB, or just drift away?